Delhi Court August 2014 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 2014 Page 20 of about 306 results (0.023 seconds)Netrapal @ Vinod Vs. Staet
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 94 of 2010 SEETAL ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Suman Chauhan, Advocate. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP. CRL.A. 661 of 2009 NARENDER @ LALA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sitab Ali Chaudhary, Advocate versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP. CRL.A. 717 of 2009 VEERPAL ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sumeet Verma and Mr. Amit Kala, Advocates. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP. WITH CRL.A. 916 of 2009 NETRAPAL @ VINOD ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Deepak Vohra, Advocate. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER0808.2014 1. These appeals are directed against the judgment dated 25 th March 2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) convicting the Appellants for the offences under Sections 395/397 of IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 and the order on se...
Tag this Judgment!il and Fs Environmental Infrastructure and Services Vs. ...........
Court: Delhi
$~2 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Co. Appl. (M) No.79/2014 IN THE MATTER OF IL & FS ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES LIMITED ......Applicant Through: Mr. Deeptakirti Advocate Verma, CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA ORDER0808.2014 % SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J (ORAL) 1. This is a first motion Application under Sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act) is in connection with a Scheme of Amalgamation (Scheme) of Integrated Waste Management and Urban Services Company (Tamil Nadu) Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Transferor Company) with IL & FS Environmental Infrastructure & Services Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Applicant/Transferee Company) and their respective Shareholders and Creditors. A copy of the Scheme has been enclosed with the Application. ================================================== Co. Appl. (M) No.79/2014 1 2. The registered Company is office of the situated at New Applicant/Transferee Delhi, within the jurisdiction of...
Tag this Judgment!Seetal Vs. State (Nct of Delhi)
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 94 of 2010 SEETAL ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Suman Chauhan, Advocate. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP. CRL.A. 661 of 2009 NARENDER @ LALA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sitab Ali Chaudhary, Advocate versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP. CRL.A. 717 of 2009 VEERPAL ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Sumeet Verma and Mr. Amit Kala, Advocates. versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP. WITH CRL.A. 916 of 2009 NETRAPAL @ VINOD ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Deepak Vohra, Advocate. versus STATE ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, APP. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER0808.2014 1. These appeals are directed against the judgment dated 25 th March 2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) convicting the Appellants for the offences under Sections 395/397 of IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 and the order on se...
Tag this Judgment!M/S Him Traders Pvt Ltd. Vs. Sh. S.K. Gupta
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RC.REV.No.546/2011 & C.M.Nos.23526-23527/2011, 17639-17640/2013 08th August, 2014 % M/S HIM TRADERS PVT LTD. Through versus ..... Petitioner Mr.N.K.Aggarwal, Advocates. SH. S.K. GUPTA ..... Respondent Mr.C.P.Vig, Advocate. Ms.Geetanjali Mohan, Advocate for applicant/sub-tenant. Through CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This revision petition under Section 25B(8) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) challenges the impugned order of the Additional Rent Controller dated 31.3.2011 which has dismissed the leave to defend application filed by the defendant/petitioner herein, inasmuch as the leave to defend application was filed beyond the period of 15 days.2. The trial court has relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Prakash H.Jain Vs. Ms. Marie Fernandes, AIR2003SC4591 however, now there is in fact a direct judgmen...
Tag this Judgment!Evaxo Pharma Private Limited and anr. Vs. ..............
Court: Delhi
$~25 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CO.PET. 249/2014 IN THE MATTER OF EVAXO PHARMA PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. S.M. Sundaram, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. Atma Sah, and Assistant Registrar of Companies for the Regional Director. Mr. Rajiv Bhel Advocate for the Official Liquidator. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA ORDER0808.2014 % SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J (ORAL) 1. This second motion joint Petition has been filed under sections 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act) seeking sanction to the Scheme of Amalgamation (Scheme) of Evaxo Pharma Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as Transferor Company) with USK Health Care Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as Transferee Company) ================================================== CO.PET. 249 /2014 1 (collectively referred as the Petitioner Companies). A copy of the Scheme has been enclosed with the petition.2. The registered offices of the Petitioner Companies are situated at New ...
Tag this Judgment!Vargas Joseantonio Mauricio Vs. D.R.i.
Court: Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DATE OF DECISION:8. h AUGUST, 2014 CRL.A. 1092/2012 & Crl. M.B. No.1704/2012 + VARGAS JOSEANTONIO MAURICIO Through ..... Appellant Mr. Sanjiv Kumar and Mr. Santosh, Advocates. Versus D.R.I. Through ..... Respondent Mr. Satish Aggarwala and Ms. Pooja Bhaskar, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA JUDGMENT : SUNITA GUPTA, J.1. This criminal appeal has been preferred under Section 374 of Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgement and order dated 07.07.2012 and 13.07.2012 passed in Sessions case No.21A/08 passed by Learned Special Judge, NDPS, Saket Court by which the appellant was convicted under Section 21(c) & 23(c) r/w Section 28 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred as NDPS Act) and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 10 years each and a fine of Rs 1 Lakh each for both the aforesaid offences, and in default of fine to further undergo S.I. for six months each for the said ...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India and ors. Vs. Sh. Rajinder Singh
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided on:08. 08.2014 + W.P.(C) 4918/2014 UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Petitioners Through : Sh. Malaya Kumar Chand, Advocate. Versus SH. RAJINDER SINGH Through : None. ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) % C.M. NO.9853/2014 (for exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. W.P.(C) 4918/2014, C.M. NOS.9851/2014 (for stay), 9852/2014 (to place on record additional documents) 1. The writ petitioners (hereafter the Northern Railways) challenge the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) dated 3.9.2013 in O.A. No.3488/2011, which found that the respondents alleged dues claimed by the petitioner were neither admitted nor obvious and thus could not permissibly be adjusted against the Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity (DCRG) owed to him. W.P.(C) 4918/2014 Page 1 2. The respondent was appointed as Head Canteen Manager in Northern Railways...
Tag this Judgment!M/S Swarovski India Pvt Ltd Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:08. 08.2014 W.P.(C) 1909/2013 M/S SWAROVSKI INDIA PVT LTD ..... Petitioner versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr M.S. Syali, Sr. Advocate with Ms Husanl Syali and Mr Mayank Nagi, Advocates. For the Respondent : Mr Kamal Sawhney, Advocate with Mr Sanjay Kumar, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. By way of this writ petition a writ of certiorari has been sought for quashing the notice dated 23.03.2012 issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) as also the order dated 25.02.2013 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax disposing the objections raised by the petitioner in respect of the assessment year 2005-2006.2. Admittedly, the issuance of the notice...
Tag this Judgment!L.K. Gupta Vs. State Through C.B.i.
Court: Delhi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. No.265 of 2008 Reserved on:21. t July 2014 Decision on:8. h August 2014 RAJEEV KUMAR GOYAL @ RAJ KUMAR GOYAL.... Appellant Through: Mr. R.K. Kohli, Advocate. versus STATE THROUGH C.B.I Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Manoj Ohri, Special Public Prosecutor WITH CRL.A. No.266 of 2008 L.K.GUPTA Through: versus STATE THROUGH C.B.I. Through: ..... Appellant Mr. Mohit Mathur, Mr. Shahrukh Hussain, Mr. Badar Mehmood, Mr. Varun Tankha and Mr. Devendra Dedha, Advocates. ..... Respondent Mr. Manoj Ohri, Spl. PP WITH CRL.A. No.269 of 2008 DEEPAK HANDA Through: ..... Appellant Mr. R.K. Handoo with Mr. Yogesh Sharma, Advocates. versus C.B.I. CRL.A. Nos. 265-66,269-70 of 2008 ..... Respondent Page 1 of 40 Through: Mr. Manoj Ohri, Special Public Prosecutor. AND CRL.A. No.270 of 2008 SANJAY RAINA Through: .... Appellant Mr. Harsh Vardhan Sharma with Mr. Rakesh Malhotra, Advocates. versus C.B.I. Through: ..... Respondent Mr. Manoj Ohri, Special Public Prosecu...
Tag this Judgment!M/S H Dohil Constructions Co (P) Ltd Vs. Rohit Lal and ors
Court: Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:24. 02.2014 Pronounced on:08. 08.2014 + CM(M) 204/2014 & CM Nos.3699-700/2014 M/S H DOHIL CONSTRUCTIONS CO (P) LTD ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajesh Manchanda with Mr. Rajat Manchanda, Advs. versus ROHIT LAL & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Surinder Jain, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI % MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI1 This petition impugns an order dated 06.11.2013 of the Additional District Judge (ADJ) which appointed a Local Commissioner for recording of evidence in the Court room between 4 and 6 pm on six consecutive dates. The order was passed in the presence of counsel and an amount of Rs.2,500/- was directed to be paid to the Local Commissioner (including stationery and typing charges) for each sitting and Rs.400/- as diet money to the Reader who would sit in Court after court hours to assist in the proceedings. While dismissing the petitioners application under Order 18 Rule 5 read with Section 151 CPC, the su...
Tag this Judgment!